A great read on Wallace, and might make some look different at the situation...

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Their stats over the last 2 years in which Wallace was a starterWallace 31 games 136-2029-16tdBrown 29 games 135-1895-7td 1td return

Brown missed 3 games last year and part of another and had 3 less TD's than Wallace
Pretty even in everything except TDs scored from 2011 where Mike wins out 8-2
Brown also seems to have a great work ethic and wants to be in Pittsburgh
Just saying

Wallace also has a great work ethic and has said he would prefer to stay in Pittsburgh. Just sayin'

I don't know why people think his work ethic has disappeared. I believe he worked out with Shaw last summer waiting to sign the tender. That doesn't sound like a guy with a poor work ethic to me.

Why are people that don't feel Wallace is the teams biggest priority labeled "Anti Wallace?"
Sh-t, I loved Yancey Thigpen and we some how survived.
I also thought Plax was a great asset to the Steelers but we managed.
Calling people delusional because we think we can make it w/o Wallace is just delusional

To be honest Pete, don't think the issue is about if Wallace is the #1 priority or not, but more the venom directed his way- as if 2012's failures lays fairly & squarley on the shoulders of Mike Wallace..

(before you all jump up & down saying that's not what you think- that was a gross generalisation).

Will the Steelers survive losing Wallace? Yes.
Will they be as good without Wallace in 2013? Probably not.
Is he the worst human being on Earth & deserve his career to be cut short because he didn't sign with the Steelers? It could be argued that some feel that way.

Chadman still is waiting for someone to address what he thinks is the bigger issue. The Steelers dumped a whole boatload of money on Antonio Brown as a result of not getting Wallace signed, a year before he became a RFA.

think about that- RFA. that means, in this FA period coming up, they could have retained Brown's playing rights using the TOP tender & only pay him just above $2m.

Instead, he'll cost $6.2 million this season (prior to the now necessary restructure- which will increase his cost next year, and the year after that).

It's not like the FO didn't KNOW how they'd be against the Salary Cap in 2013. Heck- we knew this last season.

So, in what can easily be argued was a direct reaction (over reaction) to Mike Wallace rejecting the Steelers offer, the Steelers invested heavily in a guy with 1 year's success under his belt, at the cost of how many Vets this season who will be cut because the Steelers can't fit under the cap?

It was a BAD business decision.

It's not Wallace's fault. It's not Brown's fault.

The FO screwed up. And Chadman believes it was simply because they had their nose out of joint at not being able to secure Mike Wallace on what the Steelers thought was a good deal.

All good that they secured Brown long term. He could very well be a good WR in the future. 2012 doesn't inspire a lot of confidence in that- although that appears to get overlooked, possibly because he did what many fans think ALL players should do- agree to what the Steelers offer.

But when the Steelers have to draft a rookie WR to replace Wallace, a rookie RB to replace Mendenhall, a rookie OLB to replace Harrison, a rookie ILB to replace Foote, or any other rookie to replace a Vet cut or not re-signed this season because the Steelers can't afford them- just consider how far that $4 difference between $2 RFA tenders & $6.2m contract's to WR's would have gone to not forcing a complete rebuild this season.

I'm not upset at Wallace. He has done what he feels he needed to do or will do. With that being said, the 8 million or 10 million should be enough for a person. I look at everything as a whole with my life or a persons life. Am I happy, am I healthy am I among my family and friends do I enjoy what I do and so on and am I providing for my family ? I would say I am 95% to the positive of my goals. I live near my family, everyones healthy, I'm happy but could I use more money ? Yes. Would I leave all that I have or accomplished or would I spend less time from home to make more money ? No.

Wallace should appreciate what he has a Steeler, the team that took him in, the friends he has, the history he has and all the positives. The trouble with that is, Pitsburgh isn't his home, he could be signed to a great team, he will make new friends and he'll get paid mega millions. It's obviously just a job to him and he's out for every dollar he can get.
I'm sure many of us know people with his attitude towards money. Probably not people with his kind of earning power but the character is still there.

We won't go down the tubes without Wallace and with Haley as a coach, he may not fit ino the plans anyway or at least not mean as much as he did with an Arians offense. It's tough to see him go but this team has more issues than losing Wallace.

F wallace. i still hope he gets severley injured before FA and cost him millions. the guy sold us out and the team in 2012 so not to get injured. wallace cares about wallace and nobody else. there is not 1 single NFL player that sacrifices his body for the fans, they all do it for the money. any fan that thinks a player cares for us is an idiot. if these players cared about getting injured more than making a ton of money they would all fall back on that free educatuion they received and work at a real job. name 1 player that decided to quit the nfl on their own and decide to work for 30-50K a year.

Doesn't change my opinion at all. He was offered at least $8M and and an average of $10M according to rerports. His signing bonus alone would allow someone to live very comfortably for the rest of their life. .

so, what was that signing bonus he was offered?? because that (most likely) was the sticking point. average per year means little because NFL contracts are not guaranteed.

the differences of say a $22M SB and a $10M SB is a heck of a lot. especially for someone who outplayed his comapritvely meager 350K/yr or so rookie contract

To be honest Pete, don't think the issue is about if Wallace is the #1 priority or not, but more the venom directed his way- as if 2012's failures lays fairly & squarley on the shoulders of Mike Wallace..

(before you all jump up & down saying that's not what you think- that was a gross generalisation).

Will the Steelers survive losing Wallace? Yes.
Will they be as good without Wallace in 2013? Probably not.
Is he the worst human being on Earth & deserve his career to be cut short because he didn't sign with the Steelers? It could be argued that some feel that way.

Chadman still is waiting for someone to address what he thinks is the bigger issue. The Steelers dumped a whole boatload of money on Antonio Brown as a result of not getting Wallace signed, a year before he became a RFA.

think about that- RFA. that means, in this FA period coming up, they could have retained Brown's playing rights using the TOP tender & only pay him just above $2m.

Instead, he'll cost $6.2 million this season (prior to the now necessary restructure- which will increase his cost next year, and the year after that).

It's not like the FO didn't KNOW how they'd be against the Salary Cap in 2013. Heck- we knew this last season.

So, in what can easily be argued was a direct reaction (over reaction) to Mike Wallace rejecting the Steelers offer, the Steelers invested heavily in a guy with 1 year's success under his belt, at the cost of how many Vets this season who will be cut because the Steelers can't fit under the cap?

It was a BAD business decision.

It's not Wallace's fault. It's not Brown's fault.

The FO screwed up. And Chadman believes it was simply because they had their nose out of joint at not being able to secure Mike Wallace on what the Steelers thought was a good deal.

All good that they secured Brown long term. He could very well be a good WR in the future. 2012 doesn't inspire a lot of confidence in that- although that appears to get overlooked, possibly because he did what many fans think ALL players should do- agree to what the Steelers offer.

But when the Steelers have to draft a rookie WR to replace Wallace, a rookie RB to replace Mendenhall, a rookie OLB to replace Harrison, a rookie ILB to replace Foote, or any other rookie to replace a Vet cut or not re-signed this season because the Steelers can't afford them- just consider how far that $4 difference between $2 RFA tenders & $6.2m contract's to WR's would have gone to not forcing a complete rebuild this season.

Chadman still is waiting for someone to address what he thinks is the bigger issue. The Steelers dumped a whole boatload of money on Antonio Brown as a result of not getting Wallace signed, a year before he became a RFA.

think about that- RFA. that means, in this FA period coming up, they could have retained Brown's playing rights using the TOP tender & only pay him just above $2m.

Instead, he'll cost $6.2 million this season (prior to the now necessary restructure- which will increase his cost next year, and the year after that).

It's not like the FO didn't KNOW how they'd be against the Salary Cap in 2013. Heck- we knew this last season.

So, in what can easily be argued was a direct reaction (over reaction) to Mike Wallace rejecting the Steelers offer, the Steelers invested heavily in a guy with 1 year's success under his belt, at the cost of how many Vets this season who will be cut because the Steelers can't fit under the cap?

It was a BAD business decision.

It's not Wallace's fault. It's not Brown's fault.

The FO screwed up. And Chadman believes it was simply because they had their nose out of joint at not being able to secure Mike Wallace on what the Steelers thought was a good deal.

All good that they secured Brown long term. He could very well be a good WR in the future. 2012 doesn't inspire a lot of confidence in that- although that appears to get overlooked, possibly because he did what many fans think ALL players should do- agree to what the Steelers offer.

But when the Steelers have to draft a rookie WR to replace Wallace, a rookie RB to replace Mendenhall, a rookie OLB to replace Harrison, a rookie ILB to replace Foote, or any other rookie to replace a Vet cut or not re-signed this season because the Steelers can't afford them- just consider how far that $4 difference between $2 RFA tenders & $6.2m contract's to WR's would have gone to not forcing a complete rebuild this season.

Perhaps...

Or, someone could argue that it would have been a worse business decision to go into 2013 with only Jerricho Cotchery under contract...

Think about it...so many people post on this board that, last season, it was fine for Wallace to skip workouts and training camp because "he was not under contract"...fine...

If the Steelers had not signed Brown, he would not be "under contract"...starting in March, Emmanuel Sanders will not be "under contract"...

So, where would the Steelers be if their top three WRs were not under contract, either RFA or UFA? What would happen if, after seeing what Wallace did last year, both Brown and Sanders decided that they didn't feel like coming to any workouts or training camp?

How would the Steelers offense look then?

Having an RFA WR isn't the same thing as having a WR...Mike Wallace proved that to us (and the Steelers) last year...

So, what you call a "bad business decision" because the "FO's nose was out of joint", I call "foresight" and "insurance"....I call NOT signing Brown, "putting your team in a terrible negotiating position" with ANY free agent WR, let alone the guys you drafted...

I don't think it is so much that fans think that Wallace is a 'lazy' player or not a hard worker as far as 'working out'. I think the big gripe is that he is a p*ssy. Instances of this sort of behavior are on film and occurred multiple times. We all saw Ben throw passes down the sideline that were maybe underthrown where Wallace turns, has plenty of time to make a break for the ball, but a defender is there so he stands and watches the defender either easily knock it away or pick it off with absolutely no effort to mix it up with the DB at all like the good WR's do. That is just pure lack of effort, or balls, whatever you want to say.

If that makes Wallace 'not a hard worker' then absolutely, as the proof is on film and wasn't a one time deal.

Or, someone could argue that it would have been a worse business decision to go into 2013 with only Jerricho Cotchery under contract...

Think about it...so many people post on this board that, last season, it was fine for Wallace to skip workouts and training camp because "he was not under contract"...fine...

If the Steelers had not signed Brown, he would not be "under contract"...starting in March, Emmanuel Sanders will not be "under contract"...

So, where would the Steelers be if their top three WRs were not under contract, either RFA or UFA? What would happen if, after seeing what Wallace did last year, both Brown and Sanders decided that they didn't feel like coming to any workouts or training camp?

How would the Steelers offense look then?

Having an RFA WR isn't the same thing as having a WR...Mike Wallace proved that to us (and the Steelers) last year...

So, what you call a "bad business decision" because the "FO's nose was out of joint", I call "foresight" and "insurance"....I call NOT signing Brown, "putting your team in a terrible negotiating position" with ANY free agent WR, let alone the guys you drafted...

BAD business decision?

I disagree...

The only thing that stopped Wallace from signing his RFA tender was that the Steelers & his agent were committed to signing a long-term deal. His non-signing of the RFA tender was a negotiating tactic.

The reason he didn't get a long-term contract was not because he didn't turn up to camp or sign his tender, but because the numbers Wallace was chasing, long-term, were not what the Steelers were willing to offer.

It would seem 90% of Steeler fans are happy they didn't 'overpay' Wallace.

Fair enough.

Now if, as you suggest, Brown & Sanders were to use the exact same negotiating tactic as RFA's, again- the only reason they wouldn't get signed & report to Camp would be the long-term contract numbers.

So if Brown or Sanders, as RFA's, were not signed, it would be because they were asking for more than what the Steelers were offering. And given how the fans of Pittsburgh were nearly unanimous in their disapproval of Wallace not accepting what he was offered, no doubt if Brown went down that path- the fans would feel the same way.

Thankfully, the board has decided that Brown is, essentially, the anti-Wallace, so he would never have used that tactic, right?

Here are the facts- if Antonio Brown had signed the contract he signed last season, now... he would cost $2.265m against the Cap this season. That's not his RFA tender- that's the Cap number of Year 1 of the contract he signed. As it is, because of the timing of his signing, he'll cost $6.2m in 2013.

Now- the Steelers might restructure Brown this season. His base salary is $2m. He has a $2.5m roster bonus due, as well as around $1.7m signing bonus. What they'll probably do is turn his roster bonus into part of his signing bonus, and then turn a chunk of his salary into a signing bonus. It'll reduce his cap hit in 2013 to around the $3 to $3.5m range. Not the $6.2 he currently will cost.

Good times, right?

Not so for 2014 though. His BASE SALARY jumps to $6m next season. With his 2013 salary & the roster bonus spread out over the remainder of his contract, along with the $1.7m portion of his signing bonus included- Brown could cost closer to $9m next season. And predictions of next years Cap are grim.

The Brown contract, regardless of the timing, was a pretty good one.

But when you include the timing, when you include the Steelers Salary Cap issues- if they could have had Brown's first year numbers of his contract start in 2013- there would be a lot less blood letting on the roster.